Cancelled Sky Sports because I felt guilty

Godot.

I'm, sadly, on benefits at the moment. Subscribed to Sky a few weeks ago. Shortly after the bloke installed it, I felt guilty as hell. Felt like such a scrounger because the country is in financial ruins, yet at the same time blessed for winning the lottery of life because people like me (although I'm trying hard to find work) are getting privileges like Sky Sports & Movies for doing nothing all day. Couldn't cancel because of the 12 month contract obviously, but downgraded to the bare minimum package.

Did I do the right thing and no unemployed people should be getting such expensive Sky packages, or was I just being a soft sh!te? If you think the latter don't be shy, I'm a big boy.

Sticky_Fingers

Well it's your money IMO, you can do what you want with it. If you worked and paid income tax then the dole is really just your own cash the government is giving back so you should be allowed a few luxuries.

F&ck the begrudgers tbh

Chuck Stone

Paying for the basic channels is silly because you can get most of them for free with a combi box.

Tayla

It's up to you how you spend your social welfare money, it actually drives me mad when people dictate to other people what they should be spending their money on.......

if someone mentions they go to the gym and they're on the dole then they get all kinds of abuse about how that's a luxury and they shouldn't be able to do that. I firmly believe that people and in particular people who are used to having a job and doing something with their time who then lose their job should have a hobby or a luxury to keep them sane, whether that's going to the gym, having a sociable few drinks or cans or sky or computer games or whatever it is....especially when they have to struggle with money for every other little thing. If that helps to make their time unemployed a little bit better and they can manage to pay for it out of their social welfare then they should go for it.

I think it's important for your mental health, a lot of people in Ireland today would rather deny people petty things like tea bags because they aren't an essential item.

jive

I think you're an idiot. When you are withered and old will you look back on this situation and think "man, I did the right thing back then"?? Or will you sit there decrepit, wrinkly and depressed as phuck because you missed Kun Aguero smash one in from 30 yards on his debut against Swansea in their first premier league game ever at the newly named Etihad stadium? I think the latter is more likely.

But honestly not a single phuck was given. It's your money, do what you want with it. Electricity is a luxury, why don't ya live in darkness ya sponge... because that'd be silly. Phuck everyone and get a load of rat faced Neville every weekend from now until the hour of your death, amen.

(or alternatively you could go down the pub and watch it for free :P)

flas

if you can afford it then why not!?

Saila

Tayla wrote: »

It's up to you how you spend your social welfare money, it actually drives me mad when people dictate to other people what they should be spending their money on.......

if someone mentions they go to the gym and they're on the dole then they get all kinds of abuse about how that's a luxury and they shouldn't be able to do that. I firmly believe that people and in particular people who are used to having a job and doing something with their time who then lose their job should have a hobby or a luxury to keep them sane, whether that's going to the gym, having a sociable few drinks or cans or sky or computer games or whatever it is....especially when they have to struggle with money for every other little thing. If that helps to make their time unemployed a little bit better and they can manage to pay for it out of their social welfare then they should go for it.

I think it's important for your mental health, a lot of people in Ireland today would rather deny people petty things like tea bags because they aren't an essential item.

+1 exactly right tayla

Steodonn

I taught sky sports was free these days what with the internet and all

Aoifey!

If you can afford it then go for it. Generally if you're on socially welfare and able to afford things like Sky Sports etc, it means you're cutting back in other places so why not spend the money you're saving on something you enjoy? Nobody would say a thing if you bought more expensive types of food, so why should they say something if you buy cheaper food and spend the excess on a luxury?

Killer Pigeon

Free-to-air satellite, it's the way to go.

Paully D

Just subscribe to a streaming website for a year that shows Sky Sports, at half the price of one months Sky, and you're laughing. You'll also get the 3pm Saturday games which Sky can't show.

CardBordWindow

So it was YOU that caused Roscommon A&E to be shut with your wasteful spending!! :eek:

Blazer

Op..you did the right thing.;)

While I'm here working my a$$ off I want everyone on the dole to be as miserable as possible so I can feel better about contributing to social welfare.
That means no cigarettes, no booze, no bookies, no sky sports etc and so on.

mackg

Godot. wrote: »

I'm, sadly, on benefits at the moment. Subscribed to Sky a few weeks ago. Shortly after the bloke installed it, I felt guilty as hell. Felt like such a scrounger because the country is in financial ruins, yet at the same time blessed for winning the lottery of life because people like me (although I'm trying hard to find work) are getting privileges like Sky Sports & Movies for doing nothing all day. Couldn't cancel because of the 12 month contract obviously, but downgraded to the bare minimum package.

Did I do the right thing and no unemployed people should be getting such expensive Sky packages, or was I just being a soft sh!te? If you think the latter don't be shy, I'm a big boy.

how much is Sky sports and movies these days? i checked it's stupid money, how much exactly were you left with after the rent and the sky bill?

Freddie59

Godot. wrote: »

I'm, sadly, on benefits at the moment. Subscribed to Sky a few weeks ago. Shortly after the bloke installed it, I felt guilty as hell. Felt like such a scrounger because the country is in financial ruins, yet at the same time blessed for winning the lottery of life because people like me (although I'm trying hard to find work) are getting privileges like Sky Sports & Movies for doing nothing all day. Couldn't cancel because of the 12 month contract obviously, but downgraded to the bare minimum package.

Did I do the right thing and no unemployed people should be getting such expensive Sky packages, or was I just being a soft sh!te? If you think the latter don't be shy, I'm a big boy.

Some people smoke - 20 a day. That makes SS look incredibly cheap in comparison. That being said, it's your own business. Nobody else's. (I'm in employment BTW).

PCPhoto

Meh !

(look at me - I want some attention !!)

MrVestek

I rather think that was a silly thing for you to do to be honest. I recently spent a year and a half on the dole and what did I purchase with my first back dated dole payment?

A new TV and a PS3. Some people looked down on me for this but my reasoning was if I was going to be out of work and sitting on my arse at home all day (apart from when I was running around the place handing my CV to anyone that would listen, applying online etc) I wasn't going to be bored whilst doing so.

As someone else said earlier it's money that you've paid in taxes to this government, you have every right to claim it back and do whatever you see fit with it.

phasers

Unless you're going to give the money that you would have paid the Sky people back to the social then I don't really understand why you did what you did OP.

- bo -

If there's a match on a channel I don't have like Sky/ESPN then I just stream it, if you browse around you can find some top quality streams. And I've a connection from laptop to TV so I can watch it in my room or sitting room, and I've the audio hooked up to my stereo. It's a bit of a nuisance sometimes arranging everthing but it saves a fortune.

Retiro

OP is 100% correct. Sky Sports is a luxury item, as is a gym membership. I am in full time employment, but have cut my Sky package to the minimum. If someone on the dole can afford these items, then the dole is too high.

mackg

Retiro wrote: »

OP is 100% correct. Sky Sports is a luxury item, as is a gym membership. I am in full time employment, but have cut my Sky package to the minimum. If someone on the dole can afford these items, then the dole is too high.

1 post+incendiary staement=troll

prinz

Tayla wrote: »

....especially when they have to struggle with money for every other little thing. If that helps to make their time unemployed a little bit better and they can manage to pay for it out of their social welfare then they should go for it..

As long as they don't come back and complain about struggling with money for every other little thing, then I agree.

jimbobaloobob

If your on benefits you get a sky programmes package???

Retiro

mackg wrote: »

1 post+incendiary staement=troll

No, not a WUM post. I just believe that Sky Sports is a luxury item.

hoodwinked

but ESPN is free so if you only watch that there is no need for the guilt! :pac:

Frank Black

Freesat+Saorview combined with LiveOnlineFooty.com is your friend.

There's loads of info on both on this very site and you will save 100's of euros.

You'll still get your sports and tv fix without the underlying feelings of guilt.

TheZohanS

I wouldn't begrudge anyone that's lost their job the dole but Sky Sports and Movies are luxury items.

opinion guy

I suspect this thread is your reenactment of Lord of the Rings to be honest.....

Lollipops23

OP if you can afford it then why the hell not? What you spend your money on, in your own home is compltely up to you. Just because you're on SW right now does not mean that you need to be miserable and have no fun whatsoever.
It's a tought enough time for anyone without making it even harder on yourself by denying yourself any sort of fun and relaxation.

stevenmu

Tbh if somebody on the dole has enough money for sky sports than, then the dole is too high.

Lollipops23

stevenmu wrote: »

Tbh if somebody on the dole has enough money for sky sports than, then the dole is too high.

what if they don't drink or smoke? that's a pretty big saving right there. also, most of the people I know on SW do both of those. Are you saying they shouldn't be allowed?

Maybe the gov should calculate the cost of the bare minimum of food to survive on and that should be the SW each week, no more or less....:rolleyes:

mackg

Lollipops23 wrote: »

what if they don't drink or smoke? that's a pretty big saving right there. also, most of the people I know on SW do both of those. Are you saying they shouldn't be allowed?

Maybe the gov should calculate the cost of the bare minimum of food to survive on and that should be the SW each week, no more or less....:rolleyes:

why would they consider giving less than the bare minimum needed to survive, population control? :P

stovelid

If you can make the bills balance at the end of the week by sacrificing other things, more power to you.

The dole is a payment to support you when you're looking for work (a little something back for the thousands and thousands of your taxes that have been spunked down the drain) not a public display of sackcloth and ashes for some of the mongs on here.

I've made the point many many times before, but we'd be a good distance to solving our economic woes if every soap box type on here signed an affidavit to only ever accept the hair shirt dole that they are so fond of preaching about here if they ever become unemployed during the remainder of their lives.

Abi

stevenmu wrote: »

Tbh if somebody on the dole has enough money for sky sports than, then the dole is too high.

Or not using it wisely.

This is a disguised dole row anyway. But Fwiw, the dole only gives enough rope to hang yourself.

Toby Take a Bow

stevenmu wrote: »

Tbh if somebody on the dole has enough money for sky sports than, then the dole is too high.

So if one person can afford the Sky Sports package, that means the dole for all people is too high?

Really?

jimbobaloobob

During problematic times in spain with governments etc the government is known to provide free sports channels to easy the mood of its people and to prevent revolt.

maybe this has a similar effect here..

mackg

Oh look we're having anargument about the dole again.

OP you win come on up and collect your prize.

Buddinplant

as a fellow doley, i have to say if you can afford it, then go ahead. if you were earning a wage then no one would say a word, so it should be the same for us.

i got rid of my tv, cause i couldnt afford to pay for a tv license solo and housemate was effing off soon so no point. The look of shock and disbelief i still get from people when they realise the telly is no longer a focal point of my life. ( my news and current affairs opinions are now solely dependent on this site :pac:)

Lollipops23

mackg wrote: »

why would they consider giving less than the bare minimum needed to survive, population control? :P

Going by some of the posts here you'd be forgiven for thinking some people wouldn't mind if doleys starved!:pac:

Esoteric_

If you're on JSB, then go for it. Your taxes have paid for it and it's not means tested. If you're on JSA, your means test should be re-done if you're able to afford Sky Sports tbh.

This thing really p!sses me off tbh. Not people being able to afford luxuries on their dole, that's great and hell if I saved more of my wages I could do the same too, but the stupidity of the social welfare payments. My partner is on 100 a week because he's only a babby (20), and cannot make ends meet. He recently moved county to go home because he can't afford to continue living up here in Dublin. On the other hand, my best guy friend. He has ADHD so gets disability allowance. He has absolutely no intention of getting a job (has said so himself) and gets just under 200 per week, which he spends on alcohol, junk food and cigarettes - ALL of it. His partner is also on disability because of her height (she's tiny!) and she pays her mother a certain amount in rent, spends a certain amount and saves the rest, to the point where she has several thousand in the bank in the last year alone.

I'm sorry but one person on a means tested allowance not being able to afford food and another on a means tested allowance (albeit disability) being able to p!ss his up against a wall is ridiculous.

du Maurier

Heh, "Doleys". Sounds cute. The Doleys here. The Doleys over there. Was it only in this thread it became the Doleys? I subscribe to this - we should keep the name.

mackg

LyndaMcL wrote: »

. He has absolutely no intention of getting a job (has said so himself) and gets just under 200 per week, which he spends on alcohol, junk food and cigarettes - ALL of it. His partner is also on disability because of her height (she's tiny!) and she pays her mother a certain amount in rent, spends a certain QUOTE]

how tiny is she? Is she a proper <insert PC term for midget>

stevenmu

Lollipops23 wrote: »

what if they don't drink or smoke? that's a pretty big saving right there. also, most of the people I know on SW do both of those. Are you saying they shouldn't be allowed?

I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed, but the dole shouldn't support them doing it.

Toby Take A Bow" wrote:

So if one person can afford the Sky Sports package, that means the dole for all people is too high?

Really?

No, but it's clearly too high for that person. Obviously other people will have different needs, they may have kids to support or medical expenses etc, but if someone can afford Sky Sports then I would argue that they in particular are recieving too much.



Drinking, smoking and Sky Sports are all luxuries, pretty expensive ones, and IMO the dole should not be high enough to allow for them.

Don't forget that the dole comes from a limited pool of money. Every euro spent on the dole is a euro that can't then be spent keeping hospitals open, treating or vaccinating against disease, building schools, or even giving people tax cuts so that they can spend more money and create more jobs.

prinz

stevenmu wrote: »

Don't forget that the dole comes from a limited pool of money. Every euro spent on the dole is a euro that can't then be spent keeping hospitals open, treating or vaccinating against disease, building schools, or even giving people tax cuts so that they can spend more money and create more jobs.

+1. There's a reason spending on Social Welfare has gone through the roof, while spending in other areas has stagnated or fallen fairly dramatically over the last few years. Social Welfare is turning into a massive black hole.

Toby Take a Bow

stevenmu wrote: »

I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed, but the dole shouldn't support them doing it.

No, but it's clearly too high for that person. Obviously other people will have different needs, they may have kids to support or medical expenses etc, but if someone can afford Sky Sports then I would argue that they in particular are recieving too much.

Well, as someone said previously, if he's on JSB it's his return on taxes he's spent. If/when he's still on the dole in 9 months/1 year, he'll be means-tested and this will all iron itself out (I know, in an ideal world).

When you're first on the dole, especially if it's back-dated, you may think that you've been given this fantastic gift of free money (this wasn't the case with myself, but some of my friends definitely saw it this way). After around a month, the reality quickly sets in. I know of few people who are happy on the dole, and fewer still (read: zero) who can comfortably live on the dole.

maxxie

Godot. wrote: »

I'm, sadly, on benefits at the moment. Subscribed to Sky a few weeks ago. Shortly after the bloke installed it, I felt guilty as hell. Felt like such a scrounger because the country is in financial ruins, yet at the same time blessed for winning the lottery of life because people like me (although I'm trying hard to find work) are getting privileges like Sky Sports & Movies for doing nothing all day. Couldn't cancel because of the 12 month contract obviously, but downgraded to the bare minimum package.

Did I do the right thing and no unemployed people should be getting such expensive Sky packages, or was I just being a soft sh!te? If you think the latter don't be shy, I'm a big boy.

What we got here is a crusader! :rolleyes:

Tayla

mackg wrote: »

how tiny is she? Is she a proper <insert PC term for midget>

I think the PC term is woman baby.

Logical Fallacy

prinz wrote: »

+1. There's a reason spending on Social Welfare has gone through the roof, while spending in other areas has stagnated or fallen fairly dramatically over the last few years. Social Welfare is turning into a massive black hole.

And why is it turning into a massive black hole?

Try real hard and we can get 2 + 2 to make 4 here folks.

Esoteric_

mackg wrote: »

LyndaMcL wrote: »

. He has absolutely no intention of getting a job (has said so himself) and gets just under 200 per week, which he spends on alcohol, junk food and cigarettes - ALL of it. His partner is also on disability because of her height (she's tiny!) and she pays her mother a certain amount in rent, spends a certain QUOTE]

how tiny is she? Is she a proper <insert PC term for midget>

Lol. She's about 4'5 or 4'6

prinz

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

And why is it turning into a massive black hole? Try real hard and we can get 2 + 2 to make 4 here folks.

Because it's not run properly and far too generous to some people.

Logical Fallacy

prinz wrote: »

Because it's not run properly and far too generous to some people.

You've got a 1, one more point and you can make a 2.

I know you have it in you.